|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 5:40:23 GMT -5
Post by humbleman on Nov 17, 2007 5:40:23 GMT -5
I understand that Bonnie's (aka superman's) post annoyed you, but you simply cannot accuse a nation of something, then close the thread without giving anyone the chance to reply. That is very dictatorial of you, and if you wanted to close the thread you should have locked it without any comment, pr something like: "this therad is provocative hence it will be closed". But I will like to counteract your statements, by this: A major success story over the past years is that of Romania's children. It is a fact that Romania is the only country in Central and Eastern Europe that has fundamentally reformed its child welfare system, and has managed to stop the flow of infants into child care institutions. This is a tremendous achievement by any standards and Romania has a lot to teach those countries that have not yet tackled their child institutionalisation problem.news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6267121.stmI believe an apology or self-censoring is in order.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 6:00:58 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 17, 2007 6:00:58 GMT -5
Perhaps you should take this talk with Superman ... as my words were a reaction to his stupidity.
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 6:04:01 GMT -5
Post by humbleman on Nov 17, 2007 6:04:01 GMT -5
I have no problems with you closing the thread, but you cannot make sweeping generalisations about a country, and close the thread without giving anyone a chance to reply.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 6:37:32 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 17, 2007 6:37:32 GMT -5
Really ... I thought I just did?
That was a lesson for Superman. If you're so humble, then go talk with your compatriot, since he's the one stirring up everything. He is the root to everything. So go ahead and give him some lessons. And no, I wasn't referring to your lectures on how to abandon one's family in a critical moment, after calculating that the odds disfavor you.
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 8:28:48 GMT -5
Post by humbleman on Nov 17, 2007 8:28:48 GMT -5
And no, I wasn't referring to your lectures on how to abandon one's family in a critical moment, after calculating that the odds disfavor you. Actually you are in favour of that too: you also abide by the "life above honour" principle. That's good I admire that! And as for superman, yes he is not very humble, and he really does dissapoint me. Believe you me I am trying to sort him out, but it will not be is, because he is very stubborn!
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 10:45:09 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 17, 2007 10:45:09 GMT -5
No I am not. If you're referring to what I wrote in the Turkish subforum, you misunderstood me. I said/meant that it is not right for me to dictate to others what they should prioritate; life or honour, death or submission (since we were talking about Turkish soldiers being taken hostage). Above all, if I haven't been in a similiar situation as those I criticize, it is immoral to be judgmental and say that 'they should have died instead'.
On the other hand, when it comes to me, I do not share your philosophy. I owe only myself, and hence I can decide what path to choose without any remorse, which is different from urging other people to put honour before life, while personally sitting comfortable in a couch with a full stomach, drinking tea and observing combat virtually and safely. I don't want to be responsible for other's death, be it direct or indirect.
When it comes to me, I cherish life. But there is a difference between being alive and trully living. A slave's life is not worthy, and if confronted with the known scenario of choosing between one year standing or 100 years on your knees, I'd choose the former everytime,
Your servile & fatalist attitude has never appealed to me. But I also differ from the likes of Suart & Benetton, in the sense that I do not like to persuade others to think in my terms ... or at the very least, urge people to disregard their lives and appeal for retribution against those who refuse.
Hope I clarified everything.
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 10:57:00 GMT -5
Post by suart on Nov 17, 2007 10:57:00 GMT -5
Your servile & fatalist attitude has never appealed to me ......We can see it in Kosovo, I am sure the KFOR soldiers do not polish their boots, why not? When they have the kosovars' tongues doing it.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 11:02:52 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 17, 2007 11:02:52 GMT -5
What other people do to Kfor soldiers is not my concern. This topic was afterall dubbed "Dijedon", not "Kosovars and Kfor soldiers".
But if you knew the Kosovar Albanians and their mentality, but also the Albanians in general, you'd know that what you just said is BS. Being without a state, or better put kingdom, is something that is correct. But being a free people who always put emphasis on notions such as besa, honour, dignity, pride, individuality and so forth, is something nobody can take from us, especially not a Gypsy like yourself.
Precisely that non-servile attitude delayed the creation of our own state. But our pride remains. It is up to each one to judge which should have been prioritated. All I know, as I said, is that I only owe myself and my family, and I do not wish to dictate to others what to prioritate, i.e. honour above life or vice-versa.
That's something a Gypsy such as yourself cannot comprehend in a million years. If you're such a man yourself, stop criticizing those eight former captives and join the Turkish army. It's easy to be a harda*ss miles away from the ongoing battles.
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 11:07:45 GMT -5
Post by humbleman on Nov 17, 2007 11:07:45 GMT -5
My attitude is not servile or fatalistic. Where did you come up with words like that? On the contrary it is a highly practical one in today's society (or any day's society). When someone has the upper hand over you in a situation: you just have to admit defeat, and build yourself up for a better chance. There is no point being proud: pride is worthless to you or your family if you're dead! As the saying goes: "Those who fight and run away, live to fight another day".
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 11:15:58 GMT -5
Post by suart on Nov 17, 2007 11:15:58 GMT -5
Dnnie, No kosovar can judge any albanian or turk, even any other balkan nation.
You have years to transform your society and reach at least, half the level of us. As for gypsies.... we can see your dried, ugly dressed people on TV, daily.
Please, do not make such a fool of yourself, giving us brain an moral. I was in the army and served my country with dignity, which I am sure you never done but, ran away.
Not only the sips of kosovo, but the rest of the balkans so, wish and have an army like Turkye does. Stick you besa, pride or what the hack you think you have, in your pocket.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 11:28:12 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 17, 2007 11:28:12 GMT -5
From this:
That's similiar to the slave saying: "the hand which you cannot crush, kiss". But then you go on and say something like this;
And here I do not disagree. If the chance exists, it is more cleaver to, as you say, run and fight another day. If one looks at it from a strategic point of view, that is very much the case. If faced with a stronger opponent, cut your losses and await a better moment to strike.
But the general impression one get's from your "life above honour", is that any type of life is better than death. That's where I disagree. Perhaps abstract notions such as honour and pride are incomprehensive for a perfect pragmatist such as yourself. But there must be a reason why you're avoiding the essence of this debate. What you described, i.e. run to fight another day, is not what this is about. That is strategical thinking, and the whole notion behind that is not being submissive and accept life without honour, but regrouping and awaiting the second round.
BUT, what I am referring to, is a situation where you CANNOT run and fight another day, but when you either stay and fight, or continue living in dishonor. To take an imaginary example in a historical context. Say you're an Irish peasant. Suddenly, a Viking ship arrives off the shores, and Norse warriors are upon the village where you live. Children and women have been evacuated. It's just you men left. During the corse of battle, you conclude two things; you're surrounded and you're outnumbered. Now you must make a choice. Either you die with a sword in your hand .... or you surrender and become a slave to a wealthy Viking chieftain. If you choose the latter, you will not suffer much; you will be shipped to Norway or Iceland, where, being that your owner is a wealthy man, you will be fed and clothed richly. But, you will remain a slave for the rest of your life.
Which would you choose ... run to fight another day is not an option in this case.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 17, 2007 12:19:34 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 17, 2007 12:19:34 GMT -5
LOL, two paralell discussions going on simultaneously in one thread. I do not really understand what you're aiming at. You may clarify everything to me by answering these two questions; 1) What do you mean by "Kosovar"? As is known, the term Kosovar is a geographic designation, meaning someone who lives in Kosova. Were you refering to Albanians, Serbs, Bosniaks or Turks from Kosova? They are all Kosovars. You also have Goranis, Gypsies (who in turn are divided into Ashkali, Gjiptian, Roma etc), Montenegrins, Circassians, Jews. So what type of Kosovar were you saying aren't entitled to judge Albanians and Turks? 2) Which "Kosovar" judged Albanians and Turks in this thread for you to bring it up just like that? Thanks in advance. We cannot all be extravagant fashion queens such as yourself: Why am I any less qualified than you to hold lectures on morals, or better put, debate what is moral and what is not? What army? Must one have served in an army to be called 'honorable'? Since when were the two concepts intertwined? There are people who have served in the army and who have been very dishonorable. There are those who did not serve in the army, yet have very much dignity. Furthermore, were you ever in combat? Were you ever faced by a similiar, iminent threat such as those eight Turkish captives? In that case, you're not in position to dictate to them what they should have and should not have done. Thirdly, I did not 'run away'. I live in Sweden. There's no comulsory military service here. I decided to take my chances in further studies as opposed to one year of military exercise in some forest in Northern Sweden. Chicken? Hardly. Sweden hasn't been in a war for about 200 years .... just as safe to be in the army as outside here. Depends on what you mean. Do Balkan countries envy Turkey's military superiority? Perhaps. Do most Balkan countries envy the Turkish army's status as a factor with the ability of undermining democracy? I do not believe so. I'll do precisely that, thanks.
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 18, 2007 7:02:15 GMT -5
Post by humbleman on Nov 18, 2007 7:02:15 GMT -5
Hello donnie, sorry for the late reply, but I have been caught up with all the football matches over yesterday. It was such an emotional affair, and I don't even get hung up on football. BUT, what I am referring to, is a situation where you CANNOT run and fight another day, but when you either stay and fight, or continue living in dishonor. To take an imaginary example in a historical context. Say you're an Irish peasant. Suddenly, a Viking ship arrives off the shores, and Norse warriors are upon the village where you live. Children and women have been evacuated. It's just you men left. During the corse of battle, you conclude two things; you're surrounded and you're outnumbered. Now you must make a choice. Either you die with a sword in your hand .... or you surrender and become a slave to a wealthy Viking chieftain. If you choose the latter, you will not suffer much; you will be shipped to Norway or Iceland, where, being that your owner is a wealthy man, you will be fed and clothed richly. But, you will remain a slave for the rest of your life. Which would you choose ... run to fight another day is not an option in this case. Hmm interesting position you brought up there. Well it would really depend on how I feel at the time or other mitigating circumstances! But generally I would think like this: If there is a good chance of me being alive at the end of the fight, then I would fight on. However if I conclude that there is not (and running away is not an option), then I would try to negotiate favourable terms of surrender. You never know the vikings might offer more lenient terms if they don't have to have fight. Otherwise if the odds are well against us, then I have to admit surrender and be taken as a "slave" as you call it. And yes I do think it is better to live like a slave than be dead. Once you are dead there is nothing you can do. But when you are a slave you can still learn something, experience another culture and there is always the hope of being free. I would be quite confident in my own abilities to be free eventually whether even if it came 10 years later. Don't tell me that when you are sentenced to put in prison, you would rather kill yourself.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 18, 2007 8:10:30 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 18, 2007 8:10:30 GMT -5
No problem at all. I was watching the game between Sweden & Spain myself in a sports bar with some friends. Mind you, we left quite early since the Spaniards took over and kept the game from minute one. 3-0 was the final score.
Well, there's always more alternatives in reality than there are in hypothetical scenarios, created for the purpose of raising a philosophical or moral debate. But in this case, in this scenario, it is trully either die or become a slave. And hoping to be free someday is perhaps hoping for to much. Even speaking from a realistic viewpoint. The thralls (slaves) of the Vikings were sent to Norway and Iceland, from whence they had little (if any) chance to return to Ireland, Britain or wherever they came from. Their offspring would later on assimilate fully into the Norse society. For instance in Iceland, 1/4 or so of the population is estimated to have had Irish ancestors.
But I acknowledge your reasoning. And it is your right to believe in what you believe, being a pragmatist and all. Therein lies the difference between me and 'honorable' Suart ... who himself would have put you in the difficult position of decapitation if you ever returned, for having dishonored yourself.
That is something different. If I am put to prison, it would be the consequence of a crime I had committed. I would have already dishonored myself when carrying out the crime, and that would have been the true punishment. And I do not believe in suicide, i.e. the Japanese harakiri.
In the scenario presented by me, your honor is still intact, as is your dignity as a free human being. You're suddenly confronted by the choice of either dying as such, i.e. a free man of integrity, or becoming a captive and a slave, doomed to serve a chieftain and his kin in a most servile, or if you prefer, humble manner.
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 20, 2007 13:57:54 GMT -5
Post by humbleman on Nov 20, 2007 13:57:54 GMT -5
No problem at all. I was watching the game between Sweden & Spain myself in a sports bar with some friends. Mind you, we left quite early since the Spaniards took over and kept the game from minute one. 3-0 was the final score. Sweden have (practically) qualified anyway. Perhaps. But I am quite confident with my abilities at present that I would get free someday. But on the other hand, it is probable that I would not have these abilities if I have lived in that society, because I would not have enough time or resources at my disposal to attain them. So it is hard to judge. One conclusion I am drawing from all of this is that it is unfair to judge people for not being "honourable" if you were not in that position yourself, as you have so rightly pointed out to suart. And surely having your offspring assimilate into another society is better than dieing and having no offspring at all.
|
|
donnie
Senior Moderator
Nike Leka i Kelmendit
Posts: 3,389
|
Dijedon
Nov 21, 2007 12:21:24 GMT -5
Post by donnie on Nov 21, 2007 12:21:24 GMT -5
Initially. Not now. Sweden must win against Latvia today in order to be 100 per cent secure and not dependant on the other game. This because Sweden lost to Spain while the Northern Irish won against the Danes.
Definetely.
In this scenario, you do have offspring back in Ireland. Perhaps I wasn't clear enough, but when I said that women and children had been evacuated, I also meant your hypothetical Irish wife and children. You will, in other words, have offsprings either way, whether you do it with some other Slave girl or not.
|
|
|
Dijedon
Nov 23, 2007 3:38:10 GMT -5
Post by PrijesDardanian on Nov 23, 2007 3:38:10 GMT -5
sucar ----------------? hiq? apo ju ka ra puna? :oSorry! Inappropriate vocabulary!
|
|